Clinical Cutoff Scores for Acoustic Indices of Vocal Hyperfunction That Combine Relative Fundamental Frequency and Cepstral Peak Prominence

• Published in: Journal of speech, language, and hearing research Vol. 65; no. 4; pp. 1349 - 1369
• Main Authors: Kapsner-Smith, Mara R., Díaz-Cádiz, Manuel E., Vojtech, Jennifer M., Buckley, Daniel P., Mehta, Daryush D., Hillman, Robert E., Tracy, Lauren F., Noordzij, J. Pieter, Eadie, Tanya L., Stepp, Cara E.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States American Speech-Language-Hearing Association 01.04.2022
• Subjects: Accuracy; Acoustics; Auditory Perception; Care and treatment; Cepstral analysis; Classification; Clinical Diagnosis; Control Groups; Cutting Scores; Demography; Diagnosis; Etiology; Fundamental frequency; Group Membership; Humans; Medical examination; Risk factors; ROC Curve; Speech; Speech Acoustics; Speech Impairments; Throat; Voice; Voice Disorders; Voice Disorders - diagnosis; United States
• ISSN: 1092-4388; 1558-9102; 1558-9102
• DOI: 10.1044/2021_JSLHR-21-00466

Purpose: This study examined the discriminative ability of acoustic indices of vocal hyperfunction combining smoothed cepstral peak prominence (CPPS) and relative fundamental frequency (RFF). Method: Demographic, CPPS, and RFF parameters were entered into logistic regression models trained on two 1:1 case-control groups: individuals with and without nonphonotraumatic vocal hyperfunction (NPVH; n = 360) and phonotraumatic vocal hyperfunction (PVH; n = 240). Equations from the final models were used to predict group membership in two independent test sets (n = 100 each). Results: Both CPPS and RFF parameters significantly improved model fits for NPVH and PVH after accounting for demographics. CPPS explained unique variance beyond RFF in both models. RFF explained unique variance beyond CPPS in the PVH model. Final models included CPPS and RFF offset parameters for both NPVH and PVH; RFF onset parameters were significant only in the PVH model. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for the independent test sets revealed acceptable classification for NPVH (72%) and good classification for PVH (86%). Conclusions: A combination of CPPS and RFF parameters showed better discriminative ability than either measure alone for PVH. Clinical cutoff scores for acoustic indices of vocal hyperfunction are proposed for assessment and screening purposes.